Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Mayyer Ling (2016). Exposure to English Accents in Undergraduate Settings: Gendered Responses? In
S. Sebouai et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Seminar Antarabangsa Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Kemahiran
Bahasa bagi Bukan Penuturnya: Realiti dan Harapan (InSTeLL). Universiti Islam Sultan Sharif Ali,
Bandar Seri Begawan, 3-4 February (pp. 13-29). Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei: UNISSA Press.
EXPOSURE TO ENGLISH ACCENTS IN UNDERGRADUATE SETTINGS:
GENDERED RESPONSES?
Mayyer Ling
Universiti Brunei Darussalam & Universiti Islam Sultan Sharif Ali
Abstract
Educators in the Brunei Darussalam’s education system are predominantly locals, and are many have
received their education from local universities. In addition, the first language of most of the
population is one of the seven indigenous languages including Brunei Malay. Therefore, it is not
uncommon to hear educators speaking in English with a local accent. This, however, is seen to come
with a preconceived notion of status and competence to the interlocutor. Being in a setting where
both attributes are expected to be high in educators to bridge trust between students and teachers,
and assimilate knowledge transfer, it is interesting to see if the local students’ preconceived notions
are reflective of the low status-low competence attributed to non-native-like accents abroad.
Furthermore, gender is also a vital variable in investigating the current study as Brunei is a patriarchal
society, but women are lavishly pampered with equal opportunities as men. The current study
suggests that male speakers of Received-Pronunciation and Brunei accents are the anchors for status
and competence traits, and thus, gender may very well be a factor that determines the status and
competence of the accented English-speakers in the patriarchal Sultanate.
Keywords
Accents, status, competence, gender, English as a Second Language (ESL), education.
1. Introduction
In Brunei, a variety of accents can be heard including British, American, and Malay. This is partly due
to the fact that the bilingual education system that is part of the SPN21 (National Education System
of the 21st Century) curriculum implemented nationwide allows the interaction between the local
indigenous languages of Malay, predominantly Brunei Malay and the English language. This constant
contact has caused a rise in a saliently distinct Bruneian variety of English with ‘nativised’ features
such as hybrid lexical constructions (‘they are attending the memapat jambul ceremony’) and
‘englishised’ ones such as the use of assimilated loanwords (the use of organisasi instead of
pertubuhan for ‘organisation’) in speeches of Bruneians (Hajah Rosnah, Noor-Azam and McLellan,
2002, pp. 95-112). Furthermore, English has an importance in the country. The establishment of the
Brunei-US English Language Enrichment Program launched on 7th September, 2012 encourages the
learning and usage of English both inside and outside the country. This enabled participants from
other regions to be in contact with the English variety spoken locally.
This exposure for direct contact to the local variety of spoken English brings great importance in the
exploration of ‘perceptual dialectology’ (Meyerhoff, 2006). This means that the respondents for this
study are not experts in the fields of language and linguistics. This selection criterion is crucial
because accents are such salient linguistic identity markers that is often used by every social group in
a society, including linguists and non-linguists to create stereotypes (Wardhaugh, 1986) and
ideologies (Garrett, 2010) of particular groups in a society. Even when it does not impede cross-
cultural communication (Bloch and Starks, 1999), members of the society constantly have subjective
views about different discourse communities based on their accents which can be advantageous,
disadvantageous or neutral in effect.
Therefore, the significance of this study lies in the implication of accents employed by educators, the
respondents’ probable preconceived perception on the educators due to the accents employed the
gender of the educators with accented speeches. These notions may enhance or impede knowledge
transfer between an educator and their students.
2. Literature
2.1. Responses to accents and the role of gender
There are three basic responses to accents; positive, negative and neutral. Pishghadam and Sabouri
(2011) revealed that American English was most preferred by the respondents in Iran according to
criteria such as gentle, trustworthy, sincere and patient. Thus, speakers with an American English
accent are advantaged in the Iranian society where the respondents belong to. The same cannot be
said for all variations of accents. Hosoda, Nguyan and Stone-Romero (2012) found that some accents
are clearly stigmatised such as speakers with Mexican-Spanish accents. Speakers of these accents
were seen as less suitable for jobs such as software engineer, are less likely to be hired, are less likely
to be promoted and are less competent whereas, applicants who have American English accents
were perceived to be more suited for the job applied. Furthermore, there are also accents that do
not trigger any reaction from the surrounding society such as the Mandarin-Chinese accent in certain
parts of the USA, because the ‘considerable economic and occupational success [of this ethnic group]
in the US’ rendered the Mandarin-Chinese-accented speakers neutral to stereotypes (Cargile, 2000,
p.173).
On another note, gender is also an important factor to consider in the study of accents. One of the
most recent theories developed for attitude study is the Social Constructionist Theory which claims
that individuals in a society are ‘gendered through [their] interactions’ (Baxter, 2011, p. 335). This
basically means how one judges an accent, what linguistic variables one uses and with whom these
variables are used altogether shape one’s gender.
There are studies which support Baxter’s Social Constructionist Theory such as McKenzie’s (2008)
study, which show that genders of the respondents have a significant effect on the speakers’ ratings
on accented speeches. In that study, 558 female undergraduates and postgraduates in Japan rated
speakers from the Inner Circle more positively than their male counterparts overall. Inner Circle
countries refer to countries where English is spoken as either the first language or the mother tongue
by its citizens (Kachru, 1986). Said (2001), on the other hand, found that his female respondents from
the 71 undergraduates in the USA rated accents found in the non-Inner Circle to be significantly more
positive than their male peers.
In the current research, in light with the findings from previous studies and Social Constructionist
Theory, the gender of both participants and speakers was investigated to explore its effect on
attitude ratings. Since Brunei is a patriarchal society, gender may affect the responses to accents in
the study. Thus, the first research question reads, ‘does gender play a role in determining the
responses of participants toward English accents?’
2.2. Accent as a mark for status and competence
The study of attitudes has proliferated over the years due to the spread of English as a means of
communication, information transfer and, of course, knowledge dissemination. Due to the diverse
function of English, speakers of accented English are often welcomed with a preconceived notion of
their status and competence. Status include traits that indicates how well a speaker is fairing in their
state of being. Indicators for status include the speaker’s supposed level of intelligence, their success
and ambitious nature. Competence, on the other hand, include traits that are used to forecast the
probability of success for the speaker. Some measures of competence include how likely the speaker
is to be hired, and how likely will they be promoted once they are hired.
In terms of status, Lindemann (2003) found that 39 native speakers of English undergraduates from
the University of Michigan rated native speakers of Koreans negatively on status-related traits. Not
surprisingly, speakers with native-like accents were rated favourably on the same measure. These
traits included the positive qualities (intelligent, successful, ambitious), and negative ones (lazy,
uneducated, incompetent). It was interesting that Lindemann also found that the respondents were
not necessarily familiar with Korean-accented speech to identify the ethnicity of the speakers
correctly before they passed their judgments on their accents.
Cargile, Takai and Rodriguez (2006) also found that speakers with native-like accents were rated
positively than the speakers with less-native-like proficiency. In fact, the Mainstream US English
(MUSE) accent was rated significantly more positively than speakers with African-American
Vernacular English accent. Interestingly, unlike Lindemann (2003), Cargile et al.’s study was done on
113 undergraduates from two Japanese Universities. So, the perception that native-like accent was
much preferred and was perceived to have a high status is not confined to the inner circle countries.
In terms of competence, Dailey, Giles and Jansma (2004) investigated the trait using four different
qualities, including lazy, ambitious, smart and educated on a Likert 7-point scale anchored by
‘definitely yes’ and ‘definitely no’. Considering the fact that Anglos were the dominant group in the
society and Hispanics were the minority, it was interesting to find the Hispanics themselves rated the
Hispanics-accented speakers less positively when compared to the rating given by the Anglos to the
Hispanics-accented speakers. These findings suggest that the minority-status of the population may
even reflect the perceived competence of the population on themselves without the pressure from
the dominant population.
Furthermore, Pishghadam and Sabouri (2011) also use a range of qualities to test the judgment of
listeners on the competence of speakers with accented-English. Even when the study was done in the
expanding circle country of Iran, American-accented speakers were rated the most positively on
attributes pertaining to high competence. Such attribute included being intelligent, educated,
professional, and a good teacher. The speakers were followed by British-accented speakers, Persian-
accented and finally, Arabic-accented speaker.
These studies demonstrate that native-like accents still hold preference in the minds of Nonnative
Speakers (NNS), and native speakers (NS) of English in their judgment of the status and competence
of the speakers with accents. However, it is worth noting that three factors may have affected the
results in these studies. First, the accents used in the study and the country in which the study was
conducted (i.e. Lindemann (2003) studied Korean accent, Cargile and colleagues (2006) conducted
their study in Japan) primarily belong to the Expanding Circle. In this circle, English is regarded as a
Foreign Language. This means that the speakers from these countries may use English, if it is used at
all, but it does not have a formal function to play in the society (Kachru, 1986). Second, the group
that uses the accent were heavily stigmatised in the society under study (i.e. AAVE by African
American in the United States). Third, the speakers from whom the accents belonged to were simply
dominated by another larger group in the society (i.e. Pishghadam and colleague’s (2001) studied-
accents were Anglo-Hispanics, which have dominant-minority relations).
It will be interesting to observe differences should the conditions of the study are changed. In the
current study, three conditions were changed which makes it different from previously conducted
research in accents. First, instead of conducting the study of accents in the expanding circle, the
current research is carried out in an outer circle country. Outer Circle countries uses English as the
citizens’ second language, and the language often have a formal function to play in the society such
as in education and administration settings (Kachru, 1986). Second, accents that are under study
(Brunei and British accents) are not stigmatised accents, unlike the accent of AAVE in Cargile et al.’s
study (2006). Third, there is no social group domination between the Brunei and British society in
Brunei Darussalam that may affect the responses made by the participants in the study, unlike the
status of Hispanics who are dominated by the Anglo society in Pishghadam et al.’s study (2001). In
the light of the three difference in conditions, the second research question reads,’ will speakers with
non-native accents still be seen as having lower status and lower competence when compared to
speakers with native accents?’.
There has been some research done on accents in Brunei which dealt with native and non-native
accents. Cane and Hjh Rosnah (1996) found that their 36 participants of TESL major/minor
undergraduates mostly preferred non-native speaker accents with accompanying native-standard
grammar and vocabulary, and find the former desirable as an accent that they will adopt themselves.
However, non-native accents with non-native grammar and vocabulary was seen to be the variant
that has the lowest prestige prescribed by the respondents. This study reflected the notion that
standard grammar and vocabulary carries higher importance than the standard (i.e. native) accent
itself. The result is similar to the findings of Nurliyana (2011) whereby respondents favoured non-
native accents over native ones when they had to choose one that they would adopt themselves.
Nurliyana (2011) also found native speakers to have high status (by being rated higher for intelligence
trait when compared to the rating given to Brunei accent) and friendlier.
The two research questions which guide the current study leads the researcher to decide to
investigate two of the accents that is seen to play vital roles in Brunei. These include British accent
(due to the British-based education system in the country) and Brunei accent (the accent variant
which is perceived to be the most widely spoken variety in the country). The former is a variant from
the Inner Circle of Kachru’s three-circle model of World Englishes while the latter is from the Outer
Circle in the same model (Jenkins, 2003, p. 15). The current study will shed light specifically on how
undergraduates rate the status and competence of English speakers with either British or Brunei
accents.
3. Methodology:
Participants
A total of 13 undergraduates was included in this study, 7 males and 6 females. During the time of
study, they were all reading English-medium undergraduate degrees. They have rated themselves as
at least good in the English Language (12 rated themselves as good, and 1 as excellent in the
language in the questionnaire). This selection criterion enabled participants to comprehend
instructions given and reason their responses to maximise the data collection procedure.
Instruments
The first instrument in the study is audio recordings. A modified verbal-guise technique was used in
the study. Speakers did not read the same text, but care has been taken to ensure that the content
read by speakers was free from cultural biases. Table 1 contained the list of verbatim transcripts of
the recordings. All these recordings were taken from youtube.com and are of good quality. The
Brunei and British accents recordings were taken from Radio Television Brunei (RTB) and British
Broadcasting Cooperation (BBC) respectively. All speakers were native speakers of their spoken
accents.
Table 1: Verbatim transcripts of the recordings used in the current study.
Speaker’s gender
and accent
Speakers’ 10-second speech transcripts
Male British
accent
Meet the new waste mountain; electronics. No longer as shiny as they were in
the showroom, now chucked onto the scrapheap. The numbers involved in
this are staggering.
Female Brunei
accent
Such leaders are not only those with high academic qualifications, but possess
virtuous values and has high commitment to serve their king, religion, nation
and community.
Female British
accent
But the Burmese armed forces can still put on an impressive display.
Thousands of troops marched in perfect step before their recursive leader,
General Tan Shwei to mark Armed forces day.
Male Brunei
accent
To discuss preparations for the non-ally movement summit to be held in Egypt
in July. The meeting also provides an opportunity for member countries to
coordinate activities on current matters of common concern.
The second instrument is the use of reduced vowels in recordings. Reduced vowels are features that
distinguishes the two accents under study. Brunei accented English often contain function words
which does not contain reduced vowels. Tokens such as ‘are’ are enunciated as /ɑ/ (in full vowel
sound) in Brunei accented speech as opposed to the British accented speech of /ə/ (in reduced vowel
sound). This allows salient differences to seep through the entire audio recordings between the two
accents. Further examples of tokens for reduced vowels is shown in table 2.
Table 2: Reduced vowels in the recordings used in the current study.
Recording order Speaker Tokens Realisation Reduced vowels
1 Male with
British accent
As shiny as
In
are
/əs…əs/
/ən/
/ə/
3/3
2 Female with
Brunei accent
Are
And
And(2)
/ɑ/
/æn/
/æn/
0/3
3 Female with
British accent
Can
Of
To
/kən/
/əv/
/tə/
3/3
4 Male with
Brunei accent
To
An
of
/tu/
/æn/
/of/
0/3
Both speakers with British accents reduced their vowels in the selected tokens. Meanwhile, both
speakers of Brunei accents used full vowels in function words. This is judged to be salient feature in
differentiating the speakers of both accents.
The third material used was attitude rating questionnaires. The four attributes measured were
‘rich/poor’, ‘educated/uneducated’, ‘enthusiastic/hesitant’, and ‘leader/follower. These traits were
aligned on a 6-point Likert scale, anchored by positive and negative characteristics. The absence of a
neutral point forces respondents to choose one end of the attribute investigated. The attributes
which was used to suggest status rating were ‘rich/poor’ and ‘leader/follower’, and those used to
suggest competence rating were ‘educated/uneducated’ and ‘enthusiastic/hesitant’. Table 3 is a
sample of the table that is presented to all respondents to rate all accented English.
Table 3: Sample of rating questionnaire table for accent-rating.
Speaker 1
Positive
Attributes 1 2 3 4 5 6
Negative
Attributes
Rich Poor
Educated Uneducated
Enthusiastic Hesitant
Leader Follower
Friendly Unfriendly
Honest Dishonest
The recordings containing reduced vowels were played to the participants immediately before they
gave their ratings for different speakers. For instance, the British male accent was played first and
then the respondents were given 10 seconds to rate the speaker according to the attributes listed in
the questionnaire. Then, the recording for Brunei female was played and another 10-second delay
allowed the respondents to give their ratings of the particular speaker. This process was repeated
until all four speakers in the recording were rated.
The fourth material used was a focus group interview. It is conducted after the completion of the
questionnaire in a semi-structured manner with the researcher as the moderator. The queries made
were saliently related to the attributes found in the questionnaire. This lasted for less than 30
minutes and were conducted in three small groups of 4-5 people (4 for both Female and Mixed group
and 5 for Male group). The questions asked were as follows:
1. Which of the four speakers do you think have the highest status? Why?
2. Which of the four speakers do you think have the most competence in the language? Why?
3. Which accent do you prefer? Why?
Data analysis
Two kinds of data analysis were carried out for the data obtained. First, the average ratings of the
speakers from a range of attributes were carried out. This method allowed varying degrees of
positivity/negativity of the same attribute. The scale that was used in the questionnaire was 1 to 6 so,
the higher the average scores given, the more negative the attribute for an accent. Secondly, the
compilation of preferred accents and the reasons for these preferences were collected and recorded.
Results
Table 4 shows the compilation of the average ratings given to different accents and gender of the
speakers regardless of the gender of the respondents. The important values in this table would be
the highest (highlighted in Grey) and the lowest average ratings (written in bold). The higher the
average ratings, the more negative the attribute given to the speaker. Also, since the Likert-scale
used was a 1 to 6, positive attributes ranges from 1.00-3.00 points and the negative ones from 4.00-
6.00 points.
Table 4: Average ratings of speakers by attributes regardless of gender of respondents.
Speaker
Gender of
participants
Attributes
Traits to measure status Traits to measure competence
Rich /
Poor
Leader /
Follower
Educated /
Uneducated
Enthusiastic /
Hesitant
British
male
Male 2.43 3.14 2.43 2.71
Female 2.17 1.5 1.67 2.17
Brunei
female
Male 2.43 2.71 1.43 3.14
Female 2.67 2.67 1.83 2.33
British
female
Male 2.43 4.14 2.14 3.43
Female 2.33 3 1.67 2.67
Brunei
male
Male 2.86 4 2 4
Female 3.5 3.83 2.67 3.33
Overall, regardless of the gender of the respondents, Brunei male was perceived likely to be poor,
British female was perceived likely to be a follower, while British male was perceived as likely to be
rich and a leader. This indicated that that in terms of status, British male had the highest status while
the British female and Brunei male has the lowest status.
Further, regardless of the gender of the respondents, Brunei female was perceived as likely to be
educated, while Brunei male was perceived as likely to be uneducated. British male was perceived to
be enthusiastic and British female was perceived to likely be unenthusiastic. In this case, while there
were discrepancies in the trait for competence, Brunei male and British female were vaguely
suggested to be the least competent while British male and Brunei female were equally vaguely
suggested to be most competent.
When the genders of the respondents were taken into consideration, the outcome was slightly
different. Table 5 shows the outcome of such comparison.
Table 5: Average ratings of speakers by attributes regardless of gender of respondents.
Speaker Gender of
participants
Attributes
Traits to measure status Traits to measure competence
Rich / Poor Leader /
Follower
Educated /
Uneducated
Enthusiastic /
Hesitant
RP male
Male
2.43 3.14 2.43 2.71
Br female 2.43 2.71 1.43 3.14
RP female 2.43 4.14 2.14 3.43
Br male 2.86 4 2 4
RP male
Female
2.17 1.5 1.67 2.17
Br female 2.67 2.67 1.83 2.33
RP female 2.33 3 1.67 2.67
Br male 3.5 3.83 2.67 3.33
Male participants perceived British male, British female and Brunei female as being the richest and
Brunei male was rated as the poorest by both male and female respondents. Females rated British
male the richest. Male respondents further rated Brunei female to be the most leader-like while
British male was rated as leader-like by female respondents. This outcome suggests that, as far as
status-trait is concerned, British male has the highest status, followed by Brunei female and Brunei
male has the lowest status.
In measuring the competence trait, Brunei female and British male was suggested to be the most
educated and the most enthusiastic respectively by male respondents, while British male was seen to
be the most educated and enthusiastic in accordance to the female respondents. Further, Brunei
male was seen to be the most uneducated and least enthusiastic according to female respondents.
This suggests that Brunei male was perceived to be the most competent and Brunei male was seen to
be the least so.
In sum, these results can be compressed to suggest that there is an overlap in the results when
gender is and is not taken into consideration in the interpretation of the results. In terms of status,
British male was rated most favourably while Brunei male was rated the least favourably amongst the
respondents. Meanwhile, in terms of competence, British male was seen to be the most competent
and Brunei male was rated to be the least competent.
Based on the responses from the questionnaires, respondents were encouraged to reason the ratings
that they have awarded to the speakers of the Brunei and British accents in the recordings. Their
responses have been summarised in table 5.
Table 5: Inter-gender comparison of deciding factors that influenced the process of awarding
attributes.
Trait Males Females
Highest status
(from attributes rich
and leader)
Speed of delivery
Personality portrayed
Voice quality and tone
Enunciation
Speed of delivery
Personality portrayed
Voice quality and tone
Gender
Familiarity
Most competence
(from attributes
educated and
enthusiastic)
Speed of delivery
Gender
Assumption of first
language
Voice quality and tone
Speed of delivery
Gender
Personality portrayed
The male and female participants differ only slightly in the deciding factors that enabled them to
judge the recorded speaker’s accent. One of the two most used cues was ‘personality portrayed’ as
can be implied from the following extracts:
(F1) “The first speaker sounded very expressive and very convincing…like a businessman or a
lecturer…”
(M1) “RP Male sounded like Chinese speaker trying to sound Angmo…like me…”
‘Voice quality and tone’ was also found to be another common deciding factor used in all attribute
ratings, and used by both gender in all focus groups as demonstrated below:
(F2) “His tone is attractive…he has this deep voice…”
(M2) “He sounded very British, very posh…beautiful tone of voice he has…”
Transcript extracts for ‘speed of delivery’ being important cues in awarding ratings are found below:
(F3) “Smooth, slow…therefore she is confident and thus, competent…”
(M3) “She read with no feelings…very careful…thinks about her speech…”
‘Gender’ was the determining factor that was used by both genders as can be seen from these
extracts:
(F4) “But she is a female…she cannot have the highest status…”
(M6) “She is a lady…she sounded friendly…”
The focus group then shifted in focus to determine the accent preferences of the respondents. Table
6 is a compilation of the results along with the reason for their preferences.
Table 6: Accent preference by participants and their reasons gathered from focus group interviews.
Respondents Accent preference(s) Reason(s)
F1
British male and Brunei
male
"Friendly and posh at the same time" F2
F3
F4
F5
"Gentle and not too much of an authoritative
figure"
M1 "Environmentally friendly, someone you would
want to hang out with"
M5 "Not too thick but enough to make an impression,
and is understandable" M6
M3 British male "Clear and sound intelligent"
M4
F6 British male and British
female
"Sounds educated"
M2 "Confident and can be role a model"
M7
Brunei female and
British female
"Soothing, can be understood and sounded
intelligent"
Even after focus group interviews were conducted it was suggested that British male still dominated
the preferences of most of the respondents (12 out of 13). Most of the preferences were also noted
to be from male with accented speeches (regardless of whether they are Brunei or Brunei accents)
with 12 out of 13 preferences.
Discussion
Overall, the results of this study suggests that gender is a key factor in determining attitudes towards
English accents. This is reflected in all the categories investigated where male speakers with accents
(Brunei or British) were dominantly preferred (from focus group results) and British male was seen as
having high status and competence according to the participants in the study (in questionnaires).
In the status category, local Brunei male accent was seen to have lower status when compared to the
high status-rated British male accent. This is reflective of other studies which investigates status
(Lindemann, 2003; Cargile et al., 2006) where non-native accents were rated considerably low on the
status trait. Furthermore, the accents in Lindemann’s (2003) and Cargile et al.’s (2006) study was on
stigmatised accents. It is interesting to see that the findings in the current study seems to suggest
that even when local languages such as Brunei Malay which enjoys proliferated usage in the
Sultanate, does not necessarily exempt itself from being related to low-status perception. This is
possibly due to the function of the language itself that is primarily rooted to domestic settings. Local
languages such as Brunei Malay which give rise to Brunei accented speech may as well a common
accent in the country, but do not have a status-leveraging potential, in accordance to the participants
in the study.
Competence is the next category to be discussed. In previous research such as Pishghadam et al.’s
(2010) study, speakers with native accents (specifically American accent) were often upgraded in this
classification. This seemed to be true for the responses in the current study as well because both
male and female participants rated male British speakers as being the most competent, and Brunei
male as being the least. This further instigated the fact that British accents are still seen to be highly
regarded by the respondents who are probably well-versed with the British education system
practised in the sultanate. Although the speakers were proficient enough in the English language,
they too feel that competency inherently comes with having a British accent.
It is interesting to note that the two anchors of the status and competence scale were males, both
highs for British male and lows for Brunei male. This finding is reflective of Nurliyana’s (20011) study
but the opposite to Cane and Hjh Rosnah’s (1996) accent-research. Being a patriarchal society, it
seems, does have an impact on the perception of the respondents. Female accented speeches,
regardless of whether it is Brunei or British, were seen to be averagely rated in the designated traits.
The respondents may perceive that in order to be regarded as having high status and high
competence, it is most important to have British accents so as to adhere to the standard and only
then will these local male accented-speakers can be considered as having higher status and
competence than the current stance. The same cannot be said about females with accented speech
as they may not be seen as having to be subjected to the same expectation and pressure as their
male counterparts.
Furthermore, all the cues represented subjectively-held beliefs of the participants either as a focus
group or alone. For instance, some quotations consist of comparing the recording that the
participants heard with their own accents (e.g. M1) or familiar figures (e.g. F1). Others are simply
reflections of the participants’ preferences (e.g. F2, F3, M2, and M3). There are others still who based
their judgements on societal beliefs of different gender and their roles (e.g. F4 and M6). It can be
inferred that personality portrayed, voice quality and tone and speed of delivery were used as a
platform for judging attributes of a speaker of an accent by all the informants. The subjectivity of the
responses can hardly be used as a reliable indication because of the small number of sample in the
current study. However, it must be noted that there are bound to be subjectivity in the study of
accents and the reactions to them as these kinds of studies are perceptual in nature.
Another deciding factor was gender, specifically the mention of females not being able to be in high
status positions claimed by both male and female respondents. So this deciding factor limited the
ranks possible for female speakers to occupy. This echoes what has been said earlier when males (RP
and Br accented) were seen to anchor the status-competence rating scales. This is interesting as it is
highly reflective of the male dominant society that is perceived to be present in Brunei and this
traditional societal hierarchy idea is still present in the minds of local youths even when women are
presented with the same opportunity as men and many women are already occupying high ranked
positions in the Sultanate.
Even after focus group interviews were conducted it was suggested that RP male still dominated the
preferences of most of the respondents (12 out of 13). Most of the preferences were also noted to be
from male with accented speeches (regardless of whether they are RP or Br accents) with 12 out of
13 preferences.
Furthermore, accent preferences were considered where gender again was seen to be an influential
factor as most participants preferred male-produced accented-speech (be it RP or Br). A combination
of local and Brit accents was the popular choice made by the respondents to suggest that although
the respondents wanted to suggest that they prefer the high status- competence accent, they would
also like to be identified with the local community and thus, also preferred the Br version of the male
accented speech. The balance between high prestige and solidarity resulted in the blending of accent
preferences.
Gender plays a key role in determining the participants’ ideologies toward speakers of an accent.
Brunei Darussalam, being a patriarchal society, subjected males to a high threshold level in the
status-competence scale where males were expected to have native-like proficiency in order to be
considered as high status and high competence. This was speculated to also be due to the role of
English in the Sultanate where the British education system is closely adhered to as the standard
system of education. Thus, in response to the first research question that reads ‘does gender play a
role in determining the responses of participants toward English accents?’, it seems that the gender
of the speaker with accented speech does indeed have a significant impact on the responses made by
the participants in the study. When the speakers of the accented English are male, they are
automatically subjected to the expectation of having to produce native-like accents in order to be
seen as having high-status and high-competence.
In response to the second research question that reads, ‘will speakers with non-native-like accents
still be seen as having lower status and lower competence when compared to speakers with native-
like accents. Even in a society where English is a Second Language, and the use of English has
primarily dominated the formal education setting, while the use of Brunei Malay as one of the
indigenous languages which give rise to the Brunei-accented English is ubiquitous in the Sultanate,
speakers with non-native-like proficiency was still stigmatised to a certain extent. As was previously
speculated, it may be because of the patriarchal nature of the society where males were subjected to
more pressure than females to obtain native-like proficiencies in order to be deemed high status and
high competence.
Implication for the current study rests mostly in pedagogical relevance of language classes. Firstly,
considering the fact that Brunei Malay is one of the local languages that is very widely spoken in the
Sultanate, students need to be realistic in their expectation and placement of judgement especially in
terms of status and competence. These two traits are important in building trust between students
and educators, which translates to the smooth exchange of knowledge between the two parties.
Students need to realise, via exposure, that the English language is no longer spoken only by speakers
from the Inner Circle such as Britain, and having non-native accent do not necessarily translate to low
status or competence. Enough exposure to the variation in accents will develop a more accepting
attitude toward local accented English speeches, and perhaps retract the mentality of students that
there are elements that are more important in pedagogy such as intelligibility, grammar and
vocabulary.
Second, students need to realise that they do not have to impose unnecessary pressure on
themselves in obtaining native-like accents in order to render themselves high-status or high-
competence. Langauge educators have the utmost responsibility to emphasise intelligibility, grammar
and vocabulary rather than accents in English language classes. With less burden in trying to obtain
native-like accents will create a more conducive environment for the learning of English.
Conclusion
In conclusion, in the current study it was suggested that British male was perceived to have higher
ratings in status and competence than their Brunei counterparts. It suggests that the undergraduates
in the study still do have preconceived notion that accents from Inner Circle countries (Britain) have
higher prestige than the accents from the Outer Circle countries (Brunei). Furthermore, males were
subjected to more pressure in ‘bettering’ their accents in accordance with native-like accents in order
to be highly regarded, especially in status and competence. However, subjectivity infested the
preferences of accents and further studies with larger audiences are called upon in order to verify the
current findings. Finally, increased exposure may as well be the best way forward in improving
students’ receptivity of accent variations for pedagogical improvement.
References
Baxter, J. (2011). Gender. In Simpson, J. (Ed.). The Routledge Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp.
331-343). London, England: Routledge.
Bloch, B & Starks, D. (1999). The many faces of English: intra-language variation and its implications
for international business. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 4(2), 80-88.
Cane, G., & Hjh Rosnah, H.R. (1996). Factors influencing the choice of a role model for trainee English
teachers in Brunei Darussalam. In P.W. Martin, C. Ozog, & G. Poedjosoedarmo. (Eds.),
Language Use and Language Change in Brunei Darussalam (pp.133 ‐135). Ohio: Ohio
University Centre for International Studies.
Cargile, A. (2000). Evaluations of Employment Suitability: Does Accent Always Matter?. Journal of
Employment Counseling, 37(3), 165-77.
Cargile, A. C., Takai, J. and Rodriguez, J. I. (2006). Attitudes Towards African-American Vernacular
English: A US Export to Japan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 27(6),
443-456. doi: 10.2167/jmmd472.1
Dailey, R., Giles, H., & Jansma, L. (2004). Language Attitudes in an Anglo-Hispanic Context: The Role of
the Linguistic Landscape. Conference Papers -- International Communication Association, 1.
Garrett, P. (2010). Attitudes to Language. New York, United States: Cambridge University Press.
Hajah Rosnah Haji Ramly, Noor Azam Haji-Othman & McLellan, J. A. H. (2002). Englishization and
nativisation processes in the context of Brunei Darussalam: evidence for and against. In
Kirkpatrick, A. (Ed.). Englishes in Asia: Community, Identity, Power and Education (pp. 95-112).
Melbourne, Australia: Language Australia.
Hosoda, M., Nguyen, L. T. & Stone-Romero, E. F. (2012). The effect of Hispanic accents on
employment decisions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(4), 347-364.
Jenkins, J. (2003). World Englishes: A Resource Book for Students. Abingdon, England: Routledge.
Kacrhu, B.B. (1986). The Alchemy of English: The Spread, Functions and Model of Nonnative
Englishes. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Lindemann, S. (2003). Koreans, Chinese or Indians? Attitudes and ideologies about non-native English
speakers in the United States. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 7(3), 348-364. doi:10.1111/1467-
9481.00228
McKenzie, R. M. (2008). Social factors and non-native attitudes towards varieties of spoken English: a
Japanese case study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 63-88.
doi:10.1111/j.1473-4192.2008.00179.x
Meyerhoff, M. (2006). Introducing Sociolinguistics. Abingdon, England: Routledge.
Nurliyana, H. M. (2011). Bruneians undergraduates’ attitudes towards American, British and Brunei
English accent. Unpublished academic exercise, Universiti Brunei Darussalam.
Pishghadam, R., & Sabouri, F. (2011). A Quantitative Survey on Iranian English Leamers' Attitudes
toward Varieties of English: World English or World Englishes?. English Language & Literature
Studies, 1(1), 86-95. doi:10.5539/ells.v1n1p86
Said, S. (2001). Attitudes towards accented speech: a comparative study on native and non-native
speakers of American English. Retrieved from
http://www.personal.psu.edu/sbb170/MA%20Thesis.pdf
Wardhaugh, R. (1986). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
